Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion

[Reecemartin]

Originally Posted by Bdawe

That seems to go against practice nearly everywhere with effective transit.

I would disagree, most major cities opt for breaking lines based on their general service direction. Something like YUS appears to be rare, I don't see many lines in major centres like Seoul or Tokyo or London that are not explicitly loop lines looping back on themselves. If people are taking a long enough journey a transfer or two isn't a big deal. The issue comes with low frequency transit like buses where a transfer might add 10-15 minutes per transfer.

[nname]

Originally Posted by Bdawe

That seems to go against practice nearly everywhere with effective transit.

I think most places in the world have different lines isolated from each other by having their own track. Even if you see lines running together on a map, the segment would actually have 4 or 6 tracks, with 2 dedicated for each line.

Most places with long lines are not caused by looping (except for some ring lines). It is just that those lines stretches far out of the city in both ends.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Bdawe

That seems to go against practice nearly everywhere with effective transit.

Then I'd like to see how "nearly everywhere" plans their transit. Transfers are not only inevitable, but should be encouraged, especially with rapid transit as frequent as our SkyTrain. Direct point-to-point service can only reduce efficiency.

Unless your issue is with the word "isolate," in which case you're right - routes should be integrated with each other to expedite transfers from one to another.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

Extending it eastward would make that segment act more or less like a new line. The challenge of it would be in making sure that delays from other segments don't spill over.

It would be much easier from an ops standpoint to isolate Expo into 2 segments if it was extended to ensure reliability. The downside would be that there would be an additional transfer required for any through traffic, making the line less useful for anyone looking to go further down the line.

I'm assuming that there's room at Waterfront Station to add another track and potentially another platform to deal with issues of one part of the line affecting the rest. Also, a line along hastings to the North Shore tunnelling somewhere around Clark would be counter-flow traffic, in general.... So, morning rush would be travelling in the opposite direction as the rest of traffic.

Honestly, extending the Expo Line along Hastings and then under the inlet to the North Shore would have less impact than an Expo Line extension in Surrey.

That being said... this in my opinion is only justified if the following happens:

A new car/rail tunnel from Clark to the North Shore is built.
the 1st Narrows gets closed to cars.

This new crossing would allow North Shore residents to bypass downtown without taking the #1 Hwy to do so. It would be the North Shore's Patullo bridge. It would give trucks coming up Clark ( the truck route ) direct access to Ports and industry on the North Shore.

It really depends on what your priority is...

Going West under Stanley Park is a good idea, that would potentially serve West Van and North Van better... but that would be a transit only solution.

A TRUE third crossing, would create a tunnel connecting the truck route on Knight St to the North Shore, and have a transit component to it, enabling a multi-faceted approach, allowing you to make the Lions Gate bridge transit/bike/pedestrian only, enhancing Stanley Park, and not have giving cars direct access to downtown.

[Bdawe]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Then I'd like to see how "nearly everywhere" plans their transit. Transfers are not only inevitable, but should be encouraged, especially with rapid transit as frequent as our SkyTrain. Direct point-to-point service can only reduce efficiency.

Unless your issue is with the word "isolate," in which case you're right - routes should be integrated with each other to expedite transfers from one to another.

Yes, Isolate. Most places run trains through downtown if they can, since it maximizes connectivity in different directions from the center and avoids the spacial constraints of turning large numbers of trains around in expensive real estate. London is spending many billions on connecting east and west commuter lines. Paris built the RER to accomplish the same. Subway lines in New York, Toronto, Paris, London, Philidelphia, San Francisco all run through to avoid this problem.

[waves]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

A new car/rail tunnel from Clark to the North Shore is built. The 1st Narrows gets closed to cars.

This new crossing would allow North Shore residents to bypass downtown without taking the #1 Hwy to do so. It would be the North Shore's Patullo bridge. It would give trucks coming up Clark ( the truck route ) direct access to Ports and industry on the North Shore.

A TRUE third crossing, would create a tunnel connecting the truck route on Knight St to the North Shore, and have a transit component to it, enabling a multi-faceted approach, allowing you to make the Lions Gate bridge transit/bike/pedestrian only, enhancing Stanley Park, and not have giving cars direct access to downtown.

This is an interesting idea. However, closing the Lion's Gate Bridge and moving the car traffic to Lonsdale will make traffic horrendous in the area. A high percentage of traffic feeds to the LGB directly from Highway 1 via Cap Road or Taylor Way. There is no such feeder in Lower Lonsdale.

Making the tunnel a truck route only could work, however, I would expect it to be paid for by the port and business who use it. The same can be said for a new heavy rail crossing. Additionally, although there is demand for heavy rail on the North Shore, I don't think the demand is nearly great enough to justify a second heavy rail crossing.

As for Skytrain, I think it would be better suited to have the Hastings Line not branch off to NVan and instead have the North Shore Line intersect it perpendicularly and continue to Commercial-Broadway Station (only 2 km further)

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

I'm assuming that there's room at Waterfront Station to add another track and potentially another platform to deal with issues of one part of the line affecting the rest.

Illustrative (i.e. hypothetical, not planned) Track Level diagram from the Waterfront Hub plan:


http://former.vancouver.ca/commsvcs/currentplanning/whitecaps/presentationboards2.htm

And Illustrative (i.e. hypothetical, not planned) Cross-Section:


http://former.vancouver.ca/commsvcs/currentplanning/whitecaps/presentationboards2.htm

[Reecemartin]

Sigh, isolating the lines doesn't mean we don't have good transfers. It means that we have 2 lines running 2 services.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Sigh, isolating the lines doesn't mean we don't have good transfers. It means that we have 2 lines running 2 services.

The word you're looking for is separate. Isolated implies that they're spaced far apart and/or otherwise not connected.

[officedweller]

and back to factual stuff rather than fantasy stuff...

TransLink upgrading air filters on West Coast Express

by NEWS 1130 Staff
Posted Mar 6, 2017 11:58 am PST
Last Updated Mar 6, 2017 at 12:13 pm PST

MISSION (NEWS 1130) – TransLink is upgrading the air filters on its West Coast Express trains after a University of Toronto study found carcinogenic diesel exhaust could be seeping into passenger cars. The change is being made thanks to a story you read here on NEWS1130.com.

...

http://www.news1130.com/2017/03/06/translink-upgrading-air-filters-west-coast-express/

[Reecemartin]

Originally Posted by officedweller

and back to factual stuff rather than fantasy stuff...


http://www.news1130.com/2017/03/06/translink-upgrading-air-filters-west-coast-express/

This is good though it has been pointed out in the UrbanTO forums that this isn't THAT surprising and also that drivers especially in idling traffic are likely also exposed to significant diesel fumes.

[officedweller]

Yeah, when I first saw the report I thought that it was another study studying something that probably pretty obvious in the first place.

[Hooknose]

It seems that the Go trains that come into downtown have to stay there all day because the line from Port Moody to DT Vancouver has severe traffic issues during the day. once downtown, they are stuck until rush hour.

So I heard that here was a plan to use the platform at Port Moody Skytrain station where the platform dove tails neatly with the rail, to introduce an all day service from Mission, using Budd cars to shuttle back and forth all day.

That would mean that mission would have "rapid transit" almost instantly, all day long.

It also means that when the Arbutus line is finally built, someone from Mission has RR all the way downtown and to the airport.

This is about 50 years before Abbotsford and Chilliwack can even dream of the same deal.

Has anyone else heard this?

[Migrant_Coconut]

Well, unlike Abbotsford and Chilliwack, Mission is part of the Metro. And they have been complaining about lack of proper service...

[officedweller]

Interesting idea.
Haven't heard of it before.

Is that as a supplement to WCE or replacing WCE?

Budd cars wouldn't be big enough for the morning and afternoon commuter demands and I can't see forcing people to ride SkyTrain then transfer at Port Moody as a viable replacement for WCE.

I could see it as a supplement to WCE.

If that proceeds, I could also see for something similar on the SRY to Scott Road Station (with a tie-in at Newton LRT).

PS - we don't have GO (Government of Ontario) trains here in BC.

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Well, unlike Abbotsford and Chilliwack, Mission is part of the Metro. And they have been complaining about lack of proper service...

No they aren't. Metro Van stops a Maple Ridge. Mission is in the FVRD along with Abbotsford and Chilliwack.

[casper]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Interesting idea.
Haven't heard of it before.

Is that as a supplement to WCE or replacing WCE?

Budd cars wouldn't be big enough for the morning and afternoon commuter demands and I can't see forcing people to ride SkyTrain then transfer at Port Moody as a viable replacement for WCE.

I could see it as a supplement to WCE.

PS - we don't have GO (Government of Ontario) trains here in BC.

There are some unused BUD cars that were refurbished for the Vancouver Island passenger railway but never put in to service. They are struggling to get that off the ground. Perhaps they could be persuaded to loan them to another BC rail project.

WCE is about connecting commuters to downtown Vancouver. This train would be about connecting 5 stations out to mission with the rest of the regional transit/skytrain system. Would be interesting to see the number of these passengers that head downtown versus other stations along the line.

[Bdawe]

Budd Cars? Ya know, new diesel multiple units have been built since the last Budd RDC rolled off the assembly lines in 1962. An entire 55 years of technological development! And that doesn't even mean just the kludgy Union-Pearson DMUs - there's DMU mass produced in Europe for mainline railway use like the Bombardier Talents or Alstom Coradia LINT used on the Trillium Line in Ontario, or the Stadler GTW used in New Jersey, Texas, and soon-to-be California.

Budd Cars belong in museums

-----

That being said, All day service is important to the success of a good regional rail line. With the Evergreen/DMU connection available, more people would be willing to travel on the WCE and the train would likely be much faster than the alternative bus service

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by casper

There are some unused BUD cars that were refurbished for the Vancouver Island passenger railway but never put in to service. They are struggling to get that off the ground. Perhaps they could be persuaded to loan them to another BC rail project.

WCE is about connecting commuters to downtown Vancouver. This train would be about connecting 5 stations out to mission with the rest of the regional transit/skytrain system. Would be interesting to see the number of these passengers that head downtown versus other stations along the line.

I'm pretty sure that the number of people who get off the train before Vancouver is near zero. Though at least some people may have a shorter commute if they were previously taking the WCE all the way to waterfront and then coming back along the Expo+Millennium line (why would you do this to yourself in the first place?) The problem is that this is a one-way trip until the evening, which it then goes in the opposite direction. So unless you have a job to go to near the WCE station, you're going to have to spend 8 hours before coming back, or you will have to take the bus back.

Which, speaking of buses, waiting for a bus just after the Skytrain closes is a nightmare.

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by Hooknose

The mega bucks come in getting across the harbour.

Once you are Marine Drive (say at capilano and marine), it is a simple 1,020 meter elevated guideway, along a wide road to the Upper Levels.

The lower cost of the crossing plus the small distance to the Upper Levels plus the government already owning the two cloverleaves makes this a cost natural.

The populations of West Van and North Van are about equally split at this point.

The higher cost tunnel to Lower Lonsdale would replace the ferry which already does that job, Little benefit there. The real benefit comes when you reach the Upper Levels. Now from Lower Lonsdale that takes 2,500 meters of guideway, which because of the grade will have to be tunneled in part.

Land assembly for an exchange at the top, would take some time and money and perhaps the sacrifice of some roads. You could, of course, build an elevated exchange over the ULs on stilts but that takes some cash too.

Besides being more expensive, the Upper Lonsdale exchange is closer to Phipps exchange, meaning some duplication of effort.

On balance, cost, speed, less underwater tubing, plus the ease of setting up a really great collector (which would take all Ferry traffic from HB as well, plus commuter buses from Squamish), I would say there is a saving of a billion or so with the Cap road/UL exchange.

Comments?

Pretty much everything you said in this post is wrong.

-Going up Capilano to Upper Levels would serve very few transit users.

-CNV and DNV have about three times the population of West Van, and way more transit users - mostly concentrated around high density Lonsdale.

-Seabus is ultra slow and only good for tourists.

Your desire to go way north is weird because people in those areas would angrly protest skytrain, and it's prohibitively expensive. Coastal north shore is where it's needed, wanted and relatively realistic.

On the other hand... this is just about ideal if we're not going grand scale (for Skytrain only, would be a disaster for cars - especially with no Lions Gate):

Originally Posted by twoNeurons